[OSM-talk] Suggestions for recycling schema

[Etienne]

Andy
There are a couple of really fundamental things that it might be worth
taking into account if you are doing a rework:

1.  A very clear separation between physical and administrative tags.  For
example: highway=motorway is an administrative classification, highway=steps
is a physical classification.  The two values should not share the same tag
(I was responsible for introducing highway=steps and I now see that it is
wrong).

There have been plenty of other discussion about describing the physical
characteristics of a road and the problems of using the highway tag in
places that have different or no road classification scheme.

2.  Implied attributes.  I have seen many cases where roads have been tagged
with redundant attributes.  For example highway=motorway, car=yes,
oneway=yes.  IMHO highway=motorway implies car=yes, bicycle=no, oneway=yes
and all the other rules that apply to roads with motorway status.  This
principle needs to be highlighted.

Indeed some tags can be thought of as a short hand description of a set of
lower level tags.  For example, a path might be tagged as highway=footway,
foot=yes, horse=no, bicycle=no, car=no but this can be described more
succinctly as highway=public_footpath which is a pretty well defined and
well understood notion.  Likewise highway=permissive_footpath would be
shorthand for highway=footway, foot=permissive, horse=no, bicycle=no,
car=no.

Etienne


On 9/19/06, Andy Robinson <Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
> This type of extension raises a question about how far the "Map Features"
> tagging should go and whether we should start splitting off some features
> and attributes beyond those needed for maps and map rendering to separate
> sections outside the Map_Features list itself. I can understand the wish
> to
> have a recycling annotation or sign on a map but I can only see that you
> would want to know the types of materials recycled if you were making a
> very
> specialist map or if you were using the information outside of a rendered
> map (ie information used for other purposes).
>
> I have no problem putting all of this into Map Features, but since I'm
> slowly getting around to working up the next version it would be useful to
> have feedback. The next version is expected to focus on the primary key
> types as a means of indexing so extended lists of keys and values should
> not
> be a problem but for the more casual user and those new to OSM it may be a
> bit daunting if the structure is too deep. I'm for keeping the system
> simple
> but with extensibility.
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy
>
> Andy Robinson
> Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-
> >bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Tom Chance
> >Sent: 19 September 2006 10:00 AM
> >To: talk at openstreetmap.org
> >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Suggestions for recycling schema
> >
> >Ahoy,
> >
> >On Tuesday 19 September 2006 08:34, Etienne wrote:
> >> recycling:newspaper=yes
> >> recycling:cardboard=yes
> >> recycling:glass=yes
> >
> >OK, I'll put this onto the proposed features page for further discussion.
> >Thanks for the tips :)
> >
> >Regards,
> >Tom
> >
> >--
> >The struggle against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting
> > - Kundera
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >talk mailing list
> >talk at openstreetmap.org
> >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
> >
> >--
> >No virus found in this incoming message.
> >Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.5/450 - Release Date:
> 18/09/2006
> >
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.5/450 - Release Date: 18/09/2006
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20060919/f98b98a9/attachment.html>